Presentation on theme: "Navigation Specification RNP specifications include a requirement for on-board performance monitoring and alerting RNAV specifications do not include a."— Presentation transcript:
Navigation Specification RNP specifications include a requirement for on-board performance monitoring and alerting RNAV specifications do not include a requirement for on-board performance monitoring and alerting Designation RNP X Designation RNAV X
RNAV systems — from basic to complex
A-380 Cockpit View
RNAV SYSTEM — BASIC FUNCTIONS RNAV systems are designed to provide a given level of accuracy, with repeatable and predictable path definition, appropriate to the application. The RNAV system typically integrates information from sensors, such as air data, inertial reference, radio navigation and satellite navigation, together with inputs from internal databases and data entered by the crew to perform the following functions navigation; flight plan management; guidance and control; display and system control.
RNP SYSTEM — BASIC FUNCTIONS An RNP system is an RNAV system whose functionalities support on-board performance monitoring and alerting. Current specific requirements include: capability to follow a desired ground track with reliability, repeatability and predictability, including curved paths; and where vertical profiles are included for vertical guidance, use of vertical angles or specified altitude constraints to define a desired vertical path. The performance monitoring and alerting capabilities may be provided in different forms depending on the system installation, architecture and configurations, including: display and indication of both the required and the estimated navigation system performance; monitoring of the system performance and alerting the crew when RNP requirements are not met; and cross track deviation displays scaled to RNP, in conjunction with separate monitoring and alerting for navigation integrity. An RNP system utilizes its navigation sensors, system architecture and modes of operation to satisfy the RNP navigation specification requirements. It must perform the integrity and reasonableness checks of the sensors and data, and may provide a means to deselect specific types of navigation aids to prevent reversion to an inadequate sensor. RNP requirements may limit the modes of operation of the aircraft, e.g. for low RNP, where flight technical error is a significant factor, manual flight by the crew may not be allowed. Dual system/sensor installations may also be required depending on the intended operation or need.
RNAV AND RNP SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS Performance-based flight operations are based on the ability to assure reliable, repeatable and predictable flight paths for improved capacity and efficiency in planned operations. The implementation of performance-based flight operations requires not only the functions traditionally provided by the RNAV system, but also may require specific functions to improve procedures, and airspace and air traffic operations. The system capabilities for established fixed radius paths, RNAV or RNP holding, and lateral offsets fall into this latter category.
Fixed radius paths Fixed radius paths (FRP): The FRPs take two forms: one is the radius to fix (RF) leg type. The RF leg is one of the leg types described that should be used when there is a requirement for a specific curved path radius in a terminal or approach procedure. The RF leg is defined by radius, arc length, and fix. RNP systems supporting this leg type provide the same ability to conform to the track-keeping accuracy during the turn as in the straight line segments. The other form of the FRP is intended to be used with en-route procedures. Due to the technicalities of how the procedure data are defined, it falls upon the RNP system to create the fixed radius turn (also called a fixed radius transition or FRT) between two route segments. These turns have two possible radii, 22.5 NM for high altitude routes (above FL 195) and 15 NM for low altitude routes. Using such path elements in an RNAV ATS route enables improvement in airspace usage through closely spaced parallel routes. Fix radius transition
Fly-by turns Fly-by turns are a key characteristic of an RNAV flight path. The RNAV system uses information on aircraft speed, bank angle, wind, and track angle change, to calculate a flight path turn that smoothly transitions from one path segment to the next. However, because the parameters affecting the turn radius can vary from one plane to another, as well as due to changing conditions in speed and wind, the turn initiation point and turn area can vary. Fly-by turn
Holding pattern The RNAV system facilitates the holding pattern specification by allowing the definition of the inbound course to the holding waypoint, turn direction and leg time or distance on the straight segments, as well as the ability to plan the exit from the hold. For RNP systems, further improvement in holding is available. These RNP improvements include fly-by entry into the hold, minimizing the necessary protected airspace on the non-holding side of the holding pattern, consistent with the RNP limits provided. Where RNP holding is applied, a maximum of RNP 1 is suggested since less stringent values adversely affect airspace usage and design. RNP holding pattern entries
Offset flight path RNAV systems may provide the capability for the flight crew to specify a lateral offset from a defined route. Generally, lateral offsets can be specified in increments of 1 NM up to 20 NM. When a lateral offset is activated in the RNAV system, the RNAV aircraft will depart the defined route and typically intercept the offset at a 45 degree or less angle. When the offset is cancelled, the aircraft returns to the defined route in a similar manner. Such offsets can be used both strategically, i.e. fixed offset for the length of the route, or tactically, i.e. temporarily. Most RNAV systems discontinue offsets in the terminal area or at the beginning of an approach procedure, at an RNAV hold, or during course changes of 90 degrees or greater. The amount of variability in these types of RNAV operations should be considered as operational implementation Offset flight path
Navigation application. The application of a navigation specification and the supporting navaid infrastructure, to routes, procedures, and/or defined airspace volume, in accordance with the intended airspace concept. Note.— The navigation application is one element, along with communication, surveillance and ATM procedures which meet the strategic objectives in a defined airspace concept. Airspace concept. An airspace concept provides the outline and intended framework of operations within an airspace. Airspace concepts are developed to satisfy explicit strategic objectives such as improved safety, increased air traffic capacity and mitigation of environmental impact etc. Airspace Concepts can include details of the practical organization of the airspace and its users based on particular CNS/ATM assumptions, e.g. ATS route structure, separation minima, route spacing and obstacle clearance.
An airspace concept may be viewed as a general vision or a master plan for a particular airspace. Based on particular principles, an airspace concept is geared towards specific objectives. Airspace concepts need to include a certain level of detail if changes are to be introduced within an airspace. Details could explain, for example, airspace organization and management and the roles to be played by various stakeholders and airspace users. Airspace concepts may also describe the different roles and responsibilities, mechanisms used and the relationships between people and machines.
Strategic objectives drive the general vision of the airspace concept. These objectives are usually identified by airspace users, air traffic management (ATM), airports as well as environmental and government policy. It is the function of the airspace concept and the concept of operations to respond to these requirements. The strategic objectives which most commonly drive airspace concepts are safety, capacity, efficiency, access and the environment.
Strategic objectives to airspace concept STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES Safety Capacity Efficiency Environment Access Air Space Concept
Safety: The design of RNP instrument approach procedures could be a way of increasing safety (by reducing Controlled Flights into Terrain (CFIT)). Capacity: Planning the addition of an extra runway at an airport to increase capacity will trigger a change to the airpsace concept (new approaches to SIDs and STAR required). Efficiency: A user requirement to optimize flight profiles on departure and arrival could make flights more efficient in terms of fuel burn. Environment: Requirements for reduced emissions, noise preferential routes or continuous descent/arrivals/approaches (CDA), are environmental motivators for change. Access: A requirement to provide an approach with lower minima than supported by conventional procedures, to ensure continued access to the airport during bad weather, may result in providing an RNP approach to that runway.
Although GNSS is associated primarily with navigation, GNSS is also the backbone of ADS-B surveillance applications. As such, GNSS positioning and track-keeping functions are no longer “confined” to being a navigation enabler to an airspace concept. GNSS, in this case, is also an ATS surveillance enabler. The same is true of data-link communications: data are used by an ATS surveillance system (for example, in ADS-B and navigation
Relationship: Performance-based navigation and airspace concept
AIRSPACE CONCEPTS BY AREA OF OPERATION Oceanic and remote continental Oceanic and remote continental airspace concepts are currently served by two navigation applications, RNAV 10 and RNP 4. Both these navigation applications rely primarily on GNSS to support the navigation element of the airspace concept. In the case of the RNAV 10 application, no form of ATS surveillance service is required. In the case of the RNP 4 application, ADS contract (ADS-C) is used. Continental en-route Continental en-route airspace concepts are currently supported by RNAV applications. RNAV 5 is used in the Middle East (MID) and European (EUR) Regions but as of the publication date of this manual, it is designated as B-RNAV (Basic RNAV in Europe and RNP 5 in the Middle East. In the United States, an RNAV 2 application supports an en-route continental airspace concept. At present, continental RNAV applications support airspace concepts which include radar surveillance and direct controller pilot communication (voice).
Terminal airspace: arrival and departure Existing terminal airspace concepts, which include arrival and departure, are supported by RNAV applications. These are currently used in the European (EUR) Region and the United States. The European terminal airspace RNAV application is known as P-RNAV (Precision RNAV). Although the RNAV 1 specification shares a common navigation accuracy with P- RNAV, this regional navigation specification does not satisfy the full requirements of the RNAV 1 specification. The United States terminal airspace application formerly known as US RNAV Type B has been aligned with the PBN concept and is now called RNAV 1. Basic-RNP 1 has been developed primarily for application in non-radar, low-density terminal airspace. In future, more RNP applications are expected to be developed for both en-route and terminal airspace.
ADS-C : Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Contract The basic concept of the ADS application is that the ground system will set up a contract with the aircraft such that the aircraft will automatically provide information obtained from its own on-board sensors, and pass this information to the ground system under specific circumstances dictated by the ground system (except in emergencies). Contracts are INITIATED BY THE GROUND and CAN NOT be modified by the pilot. Note that the contract is a 'dynamic agreement' between the ground system and the aircraft. It is not (as one could think) a piece of paper that has some legal value. Minimum Operational Performance Standard (MOPS) for Airborne ADS equipment : Compliance with this standard is recommended as one means of ensuring that the equipment will perform its intended functions satisfactorily under all conditions normally encountered in routine aeronautical operations.
What is B-RNAV? RNAV is a method of navigation which permits aircraft operations on any desired flight path within the coverage of station referenced navigation aids or within the limits of the capability of self-contained aids, or a combination of these. Airborne RNAV equipment automatically determines aircraft position by processing data from one or more sensors and guides the aircraft in accordance with appropriate routing instructions. Additional navigation parameters such as distance and bearing to a preselected waypoint can also be computed from the aircraft position and the location of the waypoint, dependent upon the capability of the RNAV equipment. Position can be displayed to the pilot in various ways, most practically in terms of the aircraft position relative to the precomputed desired track. Most RNAV equipment can employ any lateral displacement of the aircraft from the desired track to generate track guidance signals to the auto-pilot. With other less sophisticated RNAV equipments manual corrective action is taken by the pilot. B(asic)-RNAV defines European RNAV operations which satisfy a required track keeping accuracy of ± 5 NM for at least 95% of the flight time. This level of navigation accuracy is comparable with that which can be achieved by conventional navigation techniques on ATC routes defined by VOR/DME, when VORs are less than 100 NM apart. The ability to achieve the required level of navigation performance in a given airspace depends not only on the accuracy and functionality of the aircraft navigation equipment but also upon adequate coverage of navigation aids and position coordinates accuracy provided by the navigation infrastructure of the region. For the determination of aircraft position suitable input data can be derived from the following navigation sources : DME/DME VOR/DME (within 62 NM VOR range) INS (with radio updating or limited to 2 hours use after last on-ground position update) LORAN C (with use limitations) GPS (with use limitations) For ECAC airspace the primary sources of navigation information are VOR/DME, DME/DME and GPS. The availability and continuity of VOR and DME coverage have been calculated for most of Europe and they are considered to be capable of meeting the requirements of the en-route phase of operations (EUROCONTROL - DEMETER 2000 studies refer). Furthermore the introduction of WGS-84 as the standard geodetic reference system has provided a significant increase in the accuracy and integrity of co-ordinate data Provision of the necessary B-RNAV infrastructure (e.g. aids to navigation, B-RNAV ATS routes, B-RNAV Procedures, navigation co-ordinates) remains the responsibility of individual ECAC Member States. Each State must also ensure that supporting services (i.e. communications, navigation and surveillance) within their area of responsibility provide for the safe operation of the defined set of route spacing standards.
Approach Approach concepts cover all segments of the instrument approach, i.e. initial, intermediate, final and missed approach. They will increasingly call for RNP specifications requiring a navigation accuracy of 0.3 NM to 0.1 NM or lower. Typically, three sorts of RNP applications are characteristic of this phase of flight: new procedures to runways never served by an instrument procedure, procedures either replacing or serving as backup to existing instrument procedures based on different technologies, and procedures developed to enhance airport access in demanding environments.
STAKEHOLDER USES OF PERFORMANCE-BASED NAVIGATION Various stakeholders are involved in the development of the airspace concept and the resulting navigation application(s). These stakeholders are the airspace planners, procedure designers, aircraft manufacturers, pilots and air traffic controllers; each stakeholder has a different role and set of responsibilities. Stakeholders of performance-based navigation use the concept at different stages: — At a strategic level, airspace planners and procedure designers translate “the PBN concept” into the reality of route spacing, aircraft separation minima and procedure design. — Also at a strategic level, but after the airspace planners and procedure designers have completed their work, airworthiness and regulatory authorities ensure that aircraft and aircrew satisfy the operating requirements of the intended implementation. — At a tactical level, controllers and pilots use the PBN concept in real-time operations. They rely on the “preparatory” work completed at the strategic level by other stakeholders. All stakeholders use all the elements of the PBN concept, however, each stakeholder tends to focus on a particular part of the PBN concept.
PBN elements and specific points of interest of various stakeholders
Airspace planners, for example, focus more on the navigation system performance required by the navigation specification. While they are interested to know how the required performance of accuracy, integrity, continuity and availability are to be achieved, they use the required performance of the navigation specification to determine route spacing and separation minima. Procedure designers design instrument flight procedures in accordance with obstacle clearance criteria associated with a particular navigation specification. Unlike airspace planners, procedure designers focus on the entire navigation specification (performance, functionality and the navigation sensors of the navigation specification), as well as flight crew procedures. These specialists are also particularly interested in the navaid infrastructure because of the need to ensure that the IFP design takes into account the available or planned navaid infrastructure. The State of the Operator/Registry must ensure that the aircraft is properly certified and approved to operate in accordance with the navigation specification prescribed for operations in an airspace, along an ATS route or instrument procedure. Consequently, the State of the Operator/Registry must be cognisant of the navigation application because this provides a context to the navigation specification. The navigation specification can therefore be considered an anchor point for these three PBN stakeholders. This does not mean that stakeholders consider the navigation specification in isolation, but rather that it is their primary focus.
The position is slightly different for pilots and controllers. As end-users of the PBN concept, controllers and pilots are more involved in the navigation application which includes the navigation specification and the navaid infrastructure. For example, particularly in a mixed aircraft equipage environment, controllers may need to know what navigation sensor an aircraft is using (i.e. RNAV 1 specification can have GNSS, DME/DME/IRU and/or DME/DME) on an ATS route, procedure or airspace, to understand the effect that a NAV aid outage can have on operations. Pilots operate along a route designed and placed by the procedure designer and airspace planner while the controller ensures that separation is maintained between aircraft operating on these routes.
Safety in PBN implementation All users of the PBN concept are concerned with safety. Airspace planners and procedure designers, as well as aircraft manufacturers and air navigation service providers (ANSP), need to ensure that their part of the airspace concept meets the pertinent safety requirements. States of the Operator specify requirements for on-board equipment and then need to be satisfied that these requirements are actually being met by the manufacturers. Other authorities specify requirements for safety at the airspace concept level. These requirements are used as a basis for airspace and procedure design and, again, the authorities need to be satisfied that their requirements are being met. Demonstrating that safety requirements are being met is achieved in different ways by different stakeholders. The means used to demonstrate the safety of an airspace concept is not the same used to demonstrate that safety requirements at the aircraft level are being met. When all safety requirements have been satisfied, air traffic controllers and pilots must adhere to their respective procedures in order to ensure the safety of operations.
AIRSPACE PLANNING The determination of separation minima and route spacing for use by aircraft is a major element of airspace planning. Separation minima and route spacing can generally be described as being a function of three factors: navigation performance, aircraft’s exposure to risk and the mitigation measures which are available to reduce risk. Aircraft-to-aircraft separation and ATS route spacing are not exactly the same. As such, the degree of complexity of the “equation” depicted, graphically on next slide, depends on whether separation between two aircraft or route spacing criteria is being determined.
Aircraft to aircraft separation, for example, is usually applied between two aircraft and as a consequence, the traffic density part of the risk is usually considered to be a single aircraft pair. For route spacing purposes, this is not the case: the traffic density is determined by the volume of air traffic operating along the spaced ATS routes. This means that if aircraft in an airspace are all capable of the same navigation performance, one could expect the separation minima between a single aircraft pair to be less than the spacing required for parallel ATS routes. The complexity of determining route spacing and separation minima is affected by the availability of an ATS surveillance service and the type of communication used. If an ATS surveillance service is available, this means that the risk can be mitigated by including requirements for ATC intervention.
Determination of separation minima (1) for tactical use without ATC surveillance YesYes (2) Determination of Separation minima (1) for tactical use with ATC surveillance (2) &(3) Yes Determination of route spacing without ATC surveillance Yes Determination of route spacing with ATC surveillance Yes (Yes) Relevant Largely irrelevant; (1)In context, separation minima based on navaid or navigation sensor or PBN;(2) traffic density = single aircraft pair; (3)separation minima determined as a function of performance of ATC surveillance system. Factors affecting the determination of separation and route spacing
Impact of PBN on airspace planning When separation minima and route spacing are determined using a conventional sensor-based approach, the navigation performance data used to determine the separation minima or route spacing depend on the accuracy of the raw data from specific navigation aids such as VOR, DME or NDB. In contrast, PBN requires an RNAV system that integrates raw navigation data to provide a positioning and navigation solution. In determining separation minima and route spacing in a PBN context, this integrated navigation performance “output” is used. To determine separation minima and route spacing, airspace planners fully exploit navigation specification which prescribes the performance required from the RNAV system. Airspace planners also make use of the required performance, namely, accuracy, integrity, availability and continuity to determine route spacing and separation minima.